tis 2007-10-02 klockan 13:51 +0100 skrev Phil Barker:
> Mikael Nilsson wrote:
> > Nice summary, Phil.
> >
> > One missing item that stands out is the ISO MLR work.
> >
> Thanks Mikael. I did think about including ISO MLR in the update, but
> don't know what to say about it. I'm not really sure what stage it is
> at, and yes I should find out but haven't had the time yet. For anyone
> interested, there's a useful starting point at
> http://www.cancore.ca/betterlom.html (dated Jan 2006). If anyone knows
> of a summary of what's happened since, or is willing to post one,
> please let us know!
Well, I wish I had one. The process isn't very transparent,
unfortunately, and requires quite a bit of effort.
You can browse what is publicly available for WG4 at:
http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=5729314&objAction=browse&sort=name
Unfortunately, there's typically a browsing overhead in this. There's a
lot of related docs (N0212 & N0213) but a place to start might be N0183
& N0184
Part 1 Framework
http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/327993/806742/5729314/5791404/WG4_N0184_Proposed_Text_for_CD2_ISO_IEC_19788-1_MLR_Framework.pdf?nodeid=6211917&vernum=0
Core Elements proposal (last draft)
http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/327993/806742/5729314/5791404/WG4_N0183_Working_Committee_Draft__CD1__for_ISO_IEC_19788-2_MLR_Core_Elements.pdf?nodeid=6209434&vernum=0
(thanks to Jon Mason for the links)
>
> > More summary information on that and more work on harmonizing that work
> > with DC and LOM would be helpful for the community.
> >
> There's a lot that can be read into that comment.... It worries me that
> the ISO work on "a better LOM" and the other work on developing the LOM
> should have got to a point where they need harmonizing. It highlights
> the need for more information about both (a note directed at me).
Well, yes. Developing silo-like, monolithic metadata specifications is
so 1990's.
It seems to me that few or none of the lessons described in the
"Metadata principles and Practicalities" paper
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/weibel/04weibel.html
seem to have been learned - we're still doing after-the-fact
harmonization, which is a *whole lot* more painful than working together
from the start.
I just hope the situation can still be saved...
/Mikael
>
> Phil
> > (The above note was as much a note directed at myself actually...)
> >
> > /Mikael
> >
> >
> > tis 2007-10-02 klockan 12:21 +0100 skrev Phil Barker:
> >
> >> Hello all, I've just posted information on my JISC CETIS blog giving a
> >> brief update about some spec developments relevant to educational
> >> metadata interoperability. In short: some minor changes to the IEEE LOM
> >> have been agreed; closer harmony between the LOM and Dublin Core is in
> >> the offing; and if you think that DC comprises 15 elements you need to
> >> look at it again.
> >>
> >> See
> >> http://blogs.cetis.ac.uk/philb/2007/10/02/a-short-update-on-metadata-specs/
> >>
> >> Comments / corrections / discussion welcome, either on this list or on
> >> the blog as you prefer.
> >>
> >> Best regards, Phil.
> >>
> >>
>
--
<[log in to unmask]>
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
|